Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Roman Collector, post: 7857398, member: 75937&quot;]<b>ADDENDUM AND CORRECTION:</b></p><p><br /></p><p>I have been thinking a lot about the solution to the problem posed by the appearance of two children on this coin.</p><p><br /></p><p><img src="https://www.cointalk.com/attachments/faustina-jr-pvdicitia-s-c-seated-sestertius-two-children-bertolami-jpg.1335395/" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><blockquote><p><font size="3">Sestertius. Pudicitia, veiled, seated left, holding child on knee; in front, child standing. RIC 1382; BMCRE 2142n; Cohen 188; Strack 1303. Bertolami E-Auction 59, lot <a href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=5004444" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=5004444" rel="nofollow">739</a>, 20 May, 2018.</font></p></blockquote><p><br /></p><p>I believe I was in error when I said, &quot;I do not believe the two children illustrated on this coin depict the birth of Faustina&#039;s second child, Lucilla. The portrait and obverse inscription clearly belong to the first period of coin production; coins issued for and after the birth of Lucilla feature a completely different hairstyle and obverse inscription and are otherwise well-attested.&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>I now believe the coin commemorates the birth of Lucilla (more this coming Friday). Two observations are of importance here.</p><p><br /></p><p>1. We do see the persistence of the dative (FAVSTINAE) obverse inscriptions on some dies with Faustina&#039;s second hairstyle.</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1353964[/ATTACH]</p><blockquote><p><font size="3">RIC 500a, BMCRE 1041. <a href="https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/C_1856-1101-82" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/C_1856-1101-82" rel="nofollow">British Museum specimen</a>.</font></p></blockquote><p><br /></p><p>So, just because the nominative case inscription appears on the coins issued with her second hairstyle shortly after the birth of Lucilla in March 149, this <i>doesn&#039;t mean the dative inscription stopped being used</i>. Rather, there may have been a period of overlap when both obverse inscriptions were in use.</p><p><br /></p><p>2. We see the persistence of certain reverse types with portrait type 1 as the type 2 portrait was introduced: The Venus standing with apple and rudder type in gold and the Pudicitia type in silver (illustrated below), are examples of this.</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1353970[/ATTACH]</p><blockquote><p><font size="3">My specimen of RIC 507a, which depicts the empress in her first hairstyle. Note the dative case obverse inscription (FAVSTINAE).</font></p></blockquote><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1353976[/ATTACH]</p><blockquote><p><font size="3">British Museum specimen, <a href="https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/C_1860-0330-176" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/C_1860-0330-176" rel="nofollow">BMCRE 1051</a>, which depicts the empress in her second hairstyle. It too has the dative case obverse inscription.</font></p></blockquote><p><br /></p><p>So, just because the second hairstyle appears simultaneous with the coins issued with reverse types commemorating the birth of Lucilla in March 149, this <i>doesn&#039;t mean the reverse types seen on coins with the first hairstyle stopped being used</i>. Rather, there was a period of transition or overlap when reverse types were in use with both hairstyles.</p><p><br /></p><p>Yes, we see the nominative inscription begin shortly after coins struck to commemorate the birth of Lucilla. Yes, we see the second hairstyle begin with coins struck to commemorate the birth of Lucilla. But that doesn&#039;t mean that coins struck to commemorate the birth of Lucilla MUST have the second hairstyle or that they MUST have a nominative inscription. While the nominative inscription and the type 2 hairstyle STARTED with the birth of Lucilla, the numismatic evidence shows that the dative inscription and the first hairstyle did NOT SUDDENLY STOP on 7 March 149 with the birth of her second child.</p><p><br /></p><p>Therefore, I think the best explanation for what we see on the sestertius illustrated above with the Pudicitia seated with two children reverse is that it commemorates the birth of Lucilla but illustrates the persistence of the first hairstyle and obverse inscription. It was probably issued shortly after (or perhaps contemporaneous with) the dupondius below showing the same reverse design but without the children.</p><p><br /></p><p><img src="https://www.cointalk.com/attachments/faustina-jr-pvdicitia-s-c-seated-dupondius-jpg.1335396/" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><blockquote><p><font size="3">My specimen of RIC 1404b, a dupondius with the empress&#039; first hairstyle and first obverse inscription (dative).</font></p></blockquote><p>[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in